Celibacy is always, shall we say, an affront to what man normally thinks. It is something that can be done, and is only credible, if there is a God and if celibacy is my doorway into the kingdom of God.
There is none that calleth upon justice, neither is there any one that judgeth truly...
The full verse of Isaiah 59:4 reads:
There is none that calleth upon justince, neither is there any one that judgeth truly - but they trust in a mere nothing, and speak vanities: they have conceived labour, and brought forth iniquity.
I was tempted to go with Psalm 93:16, which reads:
Who shall rise up for me against the evildoers? Or who shall stand with me against the workers of iniquity?
That would have allowed me to lead with "certainly not the bishops of the U.S. or the neo-Catholics"! As it is, I chose to stick with Isaiah.
The topic for today is the U.S. election, which takes place tomorrow. So at least soon we shall be out of our misery with regards to that soap opera. Specifically, I wish to write about the disgraceful silence of the U.S. Catholic hierarchy, their even more disgraceful interventions where those have been present, and the scandalous acts of the neo-Catholic establishment, specifically with regards to Donald Trump's bid to assume the presidency. There will be time for a dishonourable mention of Bergoglio's attempts to interfere.
On the day before the election, I finally took time to glance at the Donald Trump's campaign policies from his own website. They didn't bring much insight as I already knew much of it. The most noteworthy were left out, these being his pledge to fight the abortion industry and his resolve to make peace with Mother Russia instead of inciting conflict.
One might have thougth that Donald Trump's Catholic detractors would at least base their criticism of him on his policies, but no, it has been anything but. From bishops to neo-Catholics, the tone has been that Donald Trump is ungentlemanly, all the while creating a false equivalence between the boorishness of Donald Trump and the sheer evil of Hillary Clinton, whose campain promises read like a what's-what of intrinsic evils. From killing the unborn in their millions in her country and abroad, to forcing the Church and her members to participate in it, to promoting sodomy and wanting to punish those opposed to it, to starting unjust wars abroad, arming Islamists, picking fights with world powers, this woman seems to he some kind of arch-agent of death.
To compare the policies of these two individuals would be akin to comparing the actions of St. Peter St. Paul with the Emperor Nero - so big is the difference between the positions. Yet one would never know it from listening to the myriad of bishops who have commented on this, and even worse from the many neo-Catholics who have come out openly against him from the very beginning. On which grounds is Donald Trump so odious? Apart from the myriad of personal attacks on the man's boorish character, we never get a response to that. Some have claimed that he is against immigrants (which is not true given he was married to the daugher of one), while some have cited that he has spoken derogatively on women. I am not the man's etiquette coach so I shall not delve into that debate, but I would expect any half-grown-up human being to realise that Donald Trump is no saint and is not running as one, so any critique we make of the man would have to be based on what he puts forth as his policies, and not who he was as a person say, 10 years ago (when, I should add, he was a member of the party he is now running against, a party which stakes its political claim on demeaning womanhood).
A few of the bishops have acquitted themselves satisfactorily, but they are few and far between. Some have been disgraceful, and there are no guesses that Cardinal Dolan is a shoe-in for that list, as is par-for-the-course by now. The actions and inactions of these bishops just serve to emphasise how much damage the Novus Ordo has done to the Church and how complicit the Church has been in much of the evil we see in the Western world today. The choices could not be clearer - one promises to attack the Church, another to defend it - yet the bishops are satisfied with "no candidate is perfect", as though there has ever been such a thing as a perfect candidate! One wonders whether these people are stupid or evil, or both, or whether they simply like to play the role of useful idiot when they have time left over for non-evangelisation!
The Remnant has done a good job of pointing out why Catholics at the very least have a duty to vote against the wicked woman - a woman who appears more satanical by the day - and made a convicing case why one would more or less have an obligation to vote for Trump. It is not a case of lesser evils (which Trump definitely is not), but one of double-effect. ChurchMilitant.tv has also done a good job, as have many traditionalist sites. The neo-Catholic sites though, on the whole, have not been as clear in their opposition and have often muddied the waters.
There are only 2 things (of which I know) for which I can fault Trump - and I write this as someone who has been following his campaign almost from the start. One of them is his position on torture, an intrinsic evil. No Catholic can support that. On this point, it is difficult to imagine Hillary Clinton thinking otherwise since she has expressed a will to bomb pretty much anybody anywhere, and is in favour of killing the unborn till the point of birth, and almost certainly afterwards; in other words, torture and death for the most innocent. The second position of Trump which worries me is that on Iran, where he has been outrageously aggresive in his rhetoric. Again, this can be compared to that wicked woman, who in 2008 said that if elected president she would attack Iran, a position which to my knowledge she has not repudiated. It is likely that Trump has taken this position to soften the opposition of the zionists, and I would predict him softening it upon winning the election. On all other issues which matter, the difference between the candidates is practically day and night.
With that in mind, and with a mind to keeping my post short, I present my top 10 list on reasons to vote for Donald J. Trump, in reverse order. By this I mean, nr. 10 is more important than nr. 1. I had to write it this way, as I am not sure that my text editor can handle a list which counts in desending order:
- Donald Trump is not a career politician. He is a man who has built a fortune on hard work and taking risks, and done a good job at it. In fact, he has managed doing what I woudl argue 99.999% of the world wants to do in a much better way than 99.999% of the world has managed.
- The man seems genuine. When he speaks, one gets the impression that he means what he says, and not that he is saying it because pollsters told him it would be good to do so.
- He has many children, which means he has a stake in the future of his country.
- He is not a warmonger, unlike virtually all the other people who at one time or another have been on the campaign for the presidency. In fact, as far as I can tell, it is only he and Rand Paul who were not warmongers out of all the candidates from all the parties.
- The political elite - who have ruined virtually everything they have touched - hate the man. He is not beholden to special interests, which means he will be far more independent-minded than any president for a long while. His opponent meanwhile, probably owes a lot of people a lot simply for keeping her out of the long arms of the law.
- The man is a convert. He is not a convert to Catholicism, of course, but for sure he is a convert from the decadence of the party he left behind. He is also a traitor to his political class, as he would probably gain far more financially from the policies he is running against.
- He has all the right enemies, and he has promised to elect good judges to his country's supreme court - which has become some sort of civilian junta, ubridled by the constitution, reason or common decency. Some do not believe Donald Trump's stance on opposing the culture of death, but the enemies certainly do. The media and the celebrities seem to be uniformly against the man, which is also a good sign.
- He has taken political correctness head on. This is a man who has a sense of outrage, and one who is not afraid to speak his mind against the outrage industry. Many are the actions of political traitors which ought to cause a sense of outrage in any decent man, but political correctness has put a stop to this. The U.S. will better off for having been unchained this dangerous phenomenon which adversely affects everything in society.
- Under him, the Church will be unleashed to preach boldly. By proposing to get rid of the Johnson amendment, the Church will be able to take political positions. No doubt many bishops in the U.S. dread this as it will give them nowhere to hide, but this could surely be a game-changer in the culture war.
- Bergoglio is against him. In fact, he has twice intervened against Donald Trump in this election cycle, first in the primaries, and lately just a few days ago. It is fair to say that if Bergoglio is against you, chances are that you are not all that bad.
If the media had not staked everything on derailing Donald Trump it is likely we would be heading towards the largest election winning margin in recent history, in any Western country. As it is, simply by being competitive, Donald Trump has overcome all the odds.
I do think he will win as it is difficult to see how a wicked woman who cannot even fill small rally venues can muster enough votes on election day to defeat a candidate who has been drawing record turnouts. Of course, we cannot discount the possibility that Donald Trump simply has the most loyal supporters of any politician in recorded history, and that only those who show up at his rallies, plus a number of faithful Catholics, plan to vote for him, but on the realm of possibilities this seems quite remote.
My guess is that the media has been manipulating the polls so as to make it seem that Donald Trump will lose for 2 reasons, the first being to demoralise his voters, and the second being to make election fraud far more palatable. After all, it is much easier to commit election fraud when the polls already show the other candidate is losing.
The polls have, however, shiften in favour of Trump for the most part. This is largely because the media, having lied for so long, realises that what little credibility it has will be obliterated if it projects a large Clinton victory only to end up with a Trump victory (assuming no election fraud, of course).
In 2013, I boldy stated that I would not be surprised if the U.S. were to collapse within 10 years. If Clinton wins, I am almost tempted to bring that date forward. If Trump wins, there is still hope.
As I have been keen to say, however, the U.S. is a country with an idiocracy for an electorate. On with an idiocracy would Hillary Clinton be anywhere near the presidency. Only in an idiocracy would we have the ridiculous toilet wars, which we do not even have in the leftist havens of Europe. Only in an idiocracy would we have talk of safe spaces, and "war on women". Only an idiocracy would a woman who sees pregnancy as a burden be considered a viable candidate by women. It is difficult to believe that even in the moral cesspool that is modern U.S.A., the people would elect a wicked woman whose only major achievement is sleeping with and being cheated on by a former president, a woman facing multiple criminal investigations even as the country heads to the vote. Then again, wicked people vote for wicked rulers.
Idioracy will kill the U.S., but if Donald Trump wins, that day of reckining will be postponed, and with any luck, completely averted.
We shall find out soon enough.
In any case, back to the original Bible verse: It is more than fair to say that the Catholic hierarchy in the U.S., and their many high-profile neo-Catholics, have neither called upon justice, nor judged truly.